So I spent my late morning and lunchtime reading this longish discussion comparing the San Francisco Bay Area (where I live) to NYC:
https://old.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/1ng6t8j/would_i_regret_moving_to_the_bay_area_nyc_local/I'm interested in these kinds of discussions because I get to see a large number of perspectives on a variety of aspects of this area.
But some topics that come up over and over again, I don't quite understand them and they annoy me. One of them is the insane focus on food/eating out. I'm sure there are people who eat out every single day, but I guess I just sub-consciously assumed that they were an extreme minority. Some of the people in these discussions talk about patronizing restaurants as if they eat out damn near every other day. The quality of nearby restaurants seems super important to them, important enough to factor in whether or not they move somewhere. Often when people are asking about moving to an area, they ask (or are offered information, occasionally unsolicited) about how good/bad the local restaurants are.
I don't understand why it's so important. In my mind, most meals are taken at home or brought from home; restaurants aren't in the picture often enough to matter, and workable fast food is everywhere. For a treat/non-cooking day, most grocery stores carry things that taste good. It makes me wonder how often these people eat out. Maybe they've been spoiled by many great past dining experiences and aren't satisfied with homemade or grocery-store delis/fast food? I mean, to me it's just food. I wouldn't drive to another city just for great tasting food, even if I could afford it. But everyone has more energy than I do.
In the linked thread, someone has become such a connoisseur, not simply of local food, but of the niche area of local
Asian food, that she or he has posted a whole paragraph of which restaurants in which cities have the best of several Asian cuisines. It just kind of blows my mind that someone eats out enough to even know of that many restaurants in that many different cities, especially given that none of them seem to be fast food chains (with which pretty much everyone is familiar).
Considering how fat so many people are, there's something perverse about this foodie culture that's represented online.
As for driving to another city just for food, another weird thing about people in this area is that they seem comfortable with SHITLOADS of driving time. One of the frequently mentioned selling points of our area is access to many kinds of nature: beaches, mountains, lakes, forests. But none of these are nearby for most Bay Area residents, who live in the urban/suburban core of the area. They talk about, they
recommend, visiting these places as if a two to three hour commute is no big deal.
When people ask questions about where to live when considering a new job in the area, commenters recommend living several towns away. Commuting long distances to work (in perennially moderately bad traffic) is an unfortunately common necessity here, but commuting seems waaayyyy too normalized in these people's minds. They should be steering away potential new commuters, not giving advice that's going to add to the traffic. Casually suggesting that people drive an hour to SF for the nightlife every weekend is another thing they do. I know that driving is way more draining for me because of autism, but damn, I cannot even imagine how desensitized these people seem to have become to it. Basically the whole package of activities and amenities they present as what makes the Bay Area attractive requires lots of driving, and I find that all the driving makes the Bay Area
unattractive, when viewed as a whole.
It kind of blows my mind that people are accepting of the homelessness, the crime, the high cost of living, the population density, the inability to trust anyone, and on top of all that are willing to drive for a while just for a burrito or some ramen. People are just so different. Different from me.
What works for me here is the weather and the relative lack of racism. I'd consider moving some place less crowded and more scenic, but white-privileged people would make my life hell. I don't know enough about other areas of California to sidestep that, and asking online is a minefield because most of the posters are white themselves and A. passive-aggressive and assholish in their responses and/or B. hellbent on downplaying racism to the point of giving misleading or useless information. This is just another facet of their racism: caring so little about people potentially being racially victimized that they thwart our efforts to avoid the victimization.
Today I've been looking into applying for a second state job, but I think I'm going to give up now. Most of the available jobs require too much people-time; that is an automatic dealbreaker. A lot of them also list an insane amount of required knowledge and a shitload of various job duties for what's basically an entry-level job. I assume that I'd at least have a chance at some of them without the knowledge/experience, but I'd be at such a huge disadvantage compared to even slightly experienced applicants that applying seems rather pointless.
Of the few doable and interesting jobs I found, the latest one describes the working environment as "an enclosed, non-windowed office cubicle" that may include "Mandatory overtime, including evening and weekend work." That sounds depressing as hell, so I'm pretty much done with this shit. I'd rather be poor than rotting in some cubicle that doesn't even have a window, and full-time work is already too many hours. I don't know how most people survive full-time jobs.
All these jobs are very practical and practical shit is not my strong suit. But the non-practical, idea jobs are mostly in academia, and I couldn't hack that either.
I have stomach cramps again so my afternoon is kind of ruined. I could probably avoid the cramps if I pushed my first meal from noon to late morning, but I very much do not want to do that. I would have to reschedule my dinner and mid-day snack, to when, I don't know, so trial-and-error and possible excess hunger and low blood sugar in between would be required. My blood sugar still drops after dinner even though I've lightened my meal, so I'm going to try to lighten it even more. I stuffed myself at lunch today, with some dark chocolate, an extra twenty grams of oats, and an extra half ounce of walnuts, so I hope to not be very hungry come dinnertime.
Seems like I sleep for longer when my blood sugar drops at night. I think I got closer to my normal five hours of sleep last night, and the reader shows my blood sugar crashed two or three times during that period. It hasn't been crashing at all these past few nights I've been getting just three hours of sleep.